* Correction of wireless-regdb for GB @ 2020-07-02 19:50 ` Ed W 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Ed W @ 2020-07-02 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: wireless-regdb, linux-wireless Hi, I think that the wireless regdb for GB domain can be corrected: According to Ofcom, in 2017 the rules were updated for the 5725-5850Ghz range to allow a power output of 200mW (the max power output is much higher still for fixed wireless where a £50 licence is purchased) Reference to the latest Ofcom document is here (IR-2030): https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf My reading of this is that DFS is currently required and I *assume* also the wmm would be the same as the rest of the range. I'm not sure if this rule needs an AUTO-BW? (Note also that Ofcom opened a proposal to remove the DFS requirement on this frequency band (and to add new 5Ghz bands). Results of this are due later in 2020.) Therefore I think that the db.txt should say: | country GB: DFS-ETSI ... # Reference (IR-2030) (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (200 mW), DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI | |Could someone appropriate please check this and update upstream.| | | |Thanks| |Ed W | || ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB @ 2020-07-02 19:50 ` Ed W 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Ed W @ 2020-07-02 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: wireless-regdb, linux-wireless Hi, I think that the wireless regdb for GB domain can be corrected: According to Ofcom, in 2017 the rules were updated for the 5725-5850Ghz range to allow a power output of 200mW (the max power output is much higher still for fixed wireless where a £50 licence is purchased) Reference to the latest Ofcom document is here (IR-2030): https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf My reading of this is that DFS is currently required and I *assume* also the wmm would be the same as the rest of the range. I'm not sure if this rule needs an AUTO-BW? (Note also that Ofcom opened a proposal to remove the DFS requirement on this frequency band (and to add new 5Ghz bands). Results of this are due later in 2020.) Therefore I think that the db.txt should say: | country GB: DFS-ETSI ... # Reference (IR-2030) (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (200 mW), DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI | |Could someone appropriate please check this and update upstream.| | | |Thanks| |Ed W | || _______________________________________________ wireless-regdb mailing list wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB 2020-07-02 19:50 ` [wireless-regdb] " Ed W @ 2020-11-06 21:44 ` Seth Forshee -1 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Seth Forshee @ 2020-11-06 21:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ed W; +Cc: wireless-regdb, linux-wireless Sorry for not responding sooner. I had started to look into this when you sent the message, but I had to set it aside and then forgot to pick it back up. On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 08:50:41PM +0100, Ed W wrote: > Hi, I think that the wireless regdb for GB domain can be corrected: > > According to Ofcom, in 2017 the rules were updated for the 5725-5850Ghz > range to allow a power output of 200mW (the max power output is much higher > still for fixed wireless where a £50 licence is purchased) > > Reference to the latest Ofcom document is here (IR-2030): > > https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf > > > My reading of this is that DFS is currently required and I *assume* also the > wmm would be the same as the rest of the range. I'm not sure if this rule > needs an AUTO-BW? AUTO-BW doesn't make sense here, however it does look like the 5470 - 5725 rule could be expanded to 5730 to allow channel 144 to be used. I agree that it looks like DFS is required, and also TPC which will require us to use 100 mW as the max EIRP. Afaik the wmmrule doesn't apply to the 5.8 GHz band, so I think that isn't required. I'll send out a patch soon with these updates. Thanks, Seth > (Note also that Ofcom opened a proposal to remove the DFS requirement on > this frequency band (and to add new 5Ghz bands). Results of this are due > later in 2020.) > > > Therefore I think that the db.txt should say: > > > | > > country GB: DFS-ETSI > ... > > # Reference (IR-2030) > (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (200 mW), DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > | > > |Could someone appropriate please check this and update upstream.| > > | > | > > |Thanks| > > |Ed W > | > > || > > > _______________________________________________ > wireless-regdb mailing list > wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB @ 2020-11-06 21:44 ` Seth Forshee 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Seth Forshee @ 2020-11-06 21:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ed W; +Cc: linux-wireless, wireless-regdb Sorry for not responding sooner. I had started to look into this when you sent the message, but I had to set it aside and then forgot to pick it back up. On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 08:50:41PM +0100, Ed W wrote: > Hi, I think that the wireless regdb for GB domain can be corrected: > > According to Ofcom, in 2017 the rules were updated for the 5725-5850Ghz > range to allow a power output of 200mW (the max power output is much higher > still for fixed wireless where a £50 licence is purchased) > > Reference to the latest Ofcom document is here (IR-2030): > > https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf > > > My reading of this is that DFS is currently required and I *assume* also the > wmm would be the same as the rest of the range. I'm not sure if this rule > needs an AUTO-BW? AUTO-BW doesn't make sense here, however it does look like the 5470 - 5725 rule could be expanded to 5730 to allow channel 144 to be used. I agree that it looks like DFS is required, and also TPC which will require us to use 100 mW as the max EIRP. Afaik the wmmrule doesn't apply to the 5.8 GHz band, so I think that isn't required. I'll send out a patch soon with these updates. Thanks, Seth > (Note also that Ofcom opened a proposal to remove the DFS requirement on > this frequency band (and to add new 5Ghz bands). Results of this are due > later in 2020.) > > > Therefore I think that the db.txt should say: > > > | > > country GB: DFS-ETSI > ... > > # Reference (IR-2030) > (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (200 mW), DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > | > > |Could someone appropriate please check this and update upstream.| > > | > | > > |Thanks| > > |Ed W > | > > || > > > _______________________________________________ > wireless-regdb mailing list > wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb _______________________________________________ wireless-regdb mailing list wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB 2020-11-06 21:44 ` Seth Forshee @ 2020-11-13 18:49 ` Ed W -1 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Ed W @ 2020-11-13 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Seth Forshee; +Cc: wireless-regdb, linux-wireless [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1637 bytes --] Hi Seth Thanks for patching this. Can I also bring a later patch that I posted to your attention, the actual patch is now out of date, but I'm posting verbatim since I think there is a 25Mhz discrepancy (?) and also my patch is almost certainly wrong, so I'm after your guidance!! :-) Essentially there has been a recent result of a consultation in the UK (GB) to expand wifi into 6Ghz *AND* to NOT require DFS on high 5Ghz channels. So in summary, the change you just made (sorry) can now be set to *NOT* need DFS in the high channels around 5.7Ghz. More details in the links below. In particular one of the additional frequency ranges (6Ghz) has an intended use of indoor where it has large power outputs (and encouraged to use larger powers by request of Intel), but it is *ALSO* allowed to be used outdoor with very low power requirements (possibly it will later fall under the UK's allowance to use higher output power if you buy a £50 licence?). I've marked it as INDOOR-ONLY since that seems safest - I'm unclear how to mark something for dual use? These changes significantly expand the available 5Ghz space in the UK, so would be nice to get upstream for general use Notes: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf Thanks if you might make this second change! Ed W On 06/11/2020 21:44, Seth Forshee wrote: > Sorry for not responding sooner. I had started to look into this when > you sent the message, but I had to set it aside and then forgot to pick > it back up. [-- Attachment #2: 0001-Update-regulatory-rules-for-UK-GB.patch --] [-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2053 bytes --] From ee0aad4566b206f313e92ab4ae98f786767892cd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: root <root@twocubed.nippynetworks.lan> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:31:18 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Update regulatory rules for UK (GB) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The IR-2030 document on p47 clarifies a difference for the UK on 5725-5850Mhz from the rest of the UK. Power levels are higher and it's possible to raise these further by purchasing a 50 GBP radio licence. Since Jan 2020 Ofcom has solicited comments on further deregulating this band to bring it into global alignment. DFS requirements have been removed and a new band in the 6Ghz space has been made available with 250mW power levels (indoor, 25mW outdoor), also with no DFS requirement. Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com> --- db.txt | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644 --- a/db.txt +++ b/db.txt @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf country GB: DFS-ETSI (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI - (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI + (5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1) - (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW) + # See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47 + (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI # 60 GHz band channels 1-6 (57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40) -- 2.26.2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB @ 2020-11-13 18:49 ` Ed W 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Ed W @ 2020-11-13 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Seth Forshee; +Cc: linux-wireless, wireless-regdb [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1599 bytes --] Hi Seth Thanks for patching this. Can I also bring a later patch that I posted to your attention, the actual patch is now out of date, but I'm posting verbatim since I think there is a 25Mhz discrepancy (?) and also my patch is almost certainly wrong, so I'm after your guidance!! :-) Essentially there has been a recent result of a consultation in the UK (GB) to expand wifi into 6Ghz *AND* to NOT require DFS on high 5Ghz channels. So in summary, the change you just made (sorry) can now be set to *NOT* need DFS in the high channels around 5.7Ghz. More details in the links below. In particular one of the additional frequency ranges (6Ghz) has an intended use of indoor where it has large power outputs (and encouraged to use larger powers by request of Intel), but it is *ALSO* allowed to be used outdoor with very low power requirements (possibly it will later fall under the UK's allowance to use higher output power if you buy a £50 licence?). I've marked it as INDOOR-ONLY since that seems safest - I'm unclear how to mark something for dual use? These changes significantly expand the available 5Ghz space in the UK, so would be nice to get upstream for general use Notes: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf Thanks if you might make this second change! Ed W On 06/11/2020 21:44, Seth Forshee wrote: > Sorry for not responding sooner. I had started to look into this when > you sent the message, but I had to set it aside and then forgot to pick > it back up. [-- Attachment #2: 0001-Update-regulatory-rules-for-UK-GB.patch --] [-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2053 bytes --] From ee0aad4566b206f313e92ab4ae98f786767892cd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: root <root@twocubed.nippynetworks.lan> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:31:18 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Update regulatory rules for UK (GB) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The IR-2030 document on p47 clarifies a difference for the UK on 5725-5850Mhz from the rest of the UK. Power levels are higher and it's possible to raise these further by purchasing a 50 GBP radio licence. Since Jan 2020 Ofcom has solicited comments on further deregulating this band to bring it into global alignment. DFS requirements have been removed and a new band in the 6Ghz space has been made available with 250mW power levels (indoor, 25mW outdoor), also with no DFS requirement. Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com> --- db.txt | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644 --- a/db.txt +++ b/db.txt @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf country GB: DFS-ETSI (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI - (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI + (5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1) - (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW) + # See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47 + (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI # 60 GHz band channels 1-6 (57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40) -- 2.26.2 [-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 170 bytes --] _______________________________________________ wireless-regdb mailing list wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB 2020-11-13 18:49 ` Ed W @ 2020-11-20 17:54 ` Seth Forshee -1 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Seth Forshee @ 2020-11-20 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ed W; +Cc: wireless-regdb, linux-wireless On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 06:49:40PM +0000, Ed W wrote: > Hi Seth > > Thanks for patching this. Can I also bring a later patch that I posted to your attention, the actual > patch is now out of date, but I'm posting verbatim since I think there is a 25Mhz discrepancy (?) > and also my patch is almost certainly wrong, so I'm after your guidance!! :-) > > Essentially there has been a recent result of a consultation in the UK (GB) to expand wifi into 6Ghz > *AND* to NOT require DFS on high 5Ghz channels. I've looked through the 6 GHz statement. One thing I'm not clear on is whether the decision is effective immediately or only once the relevant regulatory documents have been ammended (as noted in section 6.3). I did not find an updated IR 2030 at least, so I wonder if these changes should wait for that. > So in summary, the change you just made (sorry) can now be set to *NOT* need DFS in the high > channels around 5.7Ghz. More details in the links below. The document only seems to state that the DFS requirement is removed for indoor use up to 200 mW EIRP. So this range may also need to have NO-OUTDOOR added if DFS is removed. Hopefully when IR 2030 is updated the restrictions will be clear. > In particular one of the additional frequency ranges (6Ghz) has an intended use of indoor where it > has large power outputs (and encouraged to use larger powers by request of Intel), but it is *ALSO* > allowed to be used outdoor with very low power requirements (possibly it will later fall under the > UK's allowance to use higher output power if you buy a £50 licence?). I've marked it as INDOOR-ONLY > since that seems safest - I'm unclear how to mark something for dual use? I don't think that's something we've ever done. The regdb can contain two entries for the same range in a given country, I'm not sure how that will be handled by the kernel though. I'll have to look at the code. > These changes significantly expand the available 5Ghz space in the UK, so would be nice to get > upstream for general use > > > Notes: > > https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf > > https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf > > Thanks if you might make this second change! > > Ed W > > > On 06/11/2020 21:44, Seth Forshee wrote: > > Sorry for not responding sooner. I had started to look into this when > > you sent the message, but I had to set it aside and then forgot to pick > > it back up. > > From ee0aad4566b206f313e92ab4ae98f786767892cd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: root <root@twocubed.nippynetworks.lan> Can this be changed so that the patch author is the same as the information in the sign-off? > Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:31:18 +0000 > Subject: [PATCH] Update regulatory rules for UK (GB) > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > The IR-2030 document on p47 clarifies a difference for the UK on > 5725-5850Mhz from the rest of the UK. Power levels are higher and it's > possible to raise these further by purchasing a 50 GBP radio licence. > > Since Jan 2020 Ofcom has solicited comments on further deregulating this > band to bring it into global alignment. DFS requirements have been > removed and a new band in the 6Ghz space has been made available with > 250mW power levels (indoor, 25mW outdoor), also with no DFS requirement. > > Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com> > --- > db.txt | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt > index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644 > --- a/db.txt > +++ b/db.txt > @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI > # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf > # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf > # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf > +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf > country GB: DFS-ETSI > (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) > (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > - (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > + (5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI This looks okay to me. > # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1) > - (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW) > + # See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47 > + (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI To echo what I said above, I'm unclear whether this change is in effect yet, and based what I've seen so far I think it would need to include NO-OUTDOOR. > + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI I'm also unclear on whether this change is in effect yet. Thanks, Seth > # 60 GHz band channels 1-6 > (57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40) > > -- > 2.26.2 > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB @ 2020-11-20 17:54 ` Seth Forshee 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Seth Forshee @ 2020-11-20 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ed W; +Cc: linux-wireless, wireless-regdb On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 06:49:40PM +0000, Ed W wrote: > Hi Seth > > Thanks for patching this. Can I also bring a later patch that I posted to your attention, the actual > patch is now out of date, but I'm posting verbatim since I think there is a 25Mhz discrepancy (?) > and also my patch is almost certainly wrong, so I'm after your guidance!! :-) > > Essentially there has been a recent result of a consultation in the UK (GB) to expand wifi into 6Ghz > *AND* to NOT require DFS on high 5Ghz channels. I've looked through the 6 GHz statement. One thing I'm not clear on is whether the decision is effective immediately or only once the relevant regulatory documents have been ammended (as noted in section 6.3). I did not find an updated IR 2030 at least, so I wonder if these changes should wait for that. > So in summary, the change you just made (sorry) can now be set to *NOT* need DFS in the high > channels around 5.7Ghz. More details in the links below. The document only seems to state that the DFS requirement is removed for indoor use up to 200 mW EIRP. So this range may also need to have NO-OUTDOOR added if DFS is removed. Hopefully when IR 2030 is updated the restrictions will be clear. > In particular one of the additional frequency ranges (6Ghz) has an intended use of indoor where it > has large power outputs (and encouraged to use larger powers by request of Intel), but it is *ALSO* > allowed to be used outdoor with very low power requirements (possibly it will later fall under the > UK's allowance to use higher output power if you buy a £50 licence?). I've marked it as INDOOR-ONLY > since that seems safest - I'm unclear how to mark something for dual use? I don't think that's something we've ever done. The regdb can contain two entries for the same range in a given country, I'm not sure how that will be handled by the kernel though. I'll have to look at the code. > These changes significantly expand the available 5Ghz space in the UK, so would be nice to get > upstream for general use > > > Notes: > > https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf > > https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf > > Thanks if you might make this second change! > > Ed W > > > On 06/11/2020 21:44, Seth Forshee wrote: > > Sorry for not responding sooner. I had started to look into this when > > you sent the message, but I had to set it aside and then forgot to pick > > it back up. > > From ee0aad4566b206f313e92ab4ae98f786767892cd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: root <root@twocubed.nippynetworks.lan> Can this be changed so that the patch author is the same as the information in the sign-off? > Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:31:18 +0000 > Subject: [PATCH] Update regulatory rules for UK (GB) > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > The IR-2030 document on p47 clarifies a difference for the UK on > 5725-5850Mhz from the rest of the UK. Power levels are higher and it's > possible to raise these further by purchasing a 50 GBP radio licence. > > Since Jan 2020 Ofcom has solicited comments on further deregulating this > band to bring it into global alignment. DFS requirements have been > removed and a new band in the 6Ghz space has been made available with > 250mW power levels (indoor, 25mW outdoor), also with no DFS requirement. > > Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com> > --- > db.txt | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt > index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644 > --- a/db.txt > +++ b/db.txt > @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI > # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf > # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf > # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf > +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf > country GB: DFS-ETSI > (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) > (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > - (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > + (5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI This looks okay to me. > # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1) > - (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW) > + # See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47 > + (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI To echo what I said above, I'm unclear whether this change is in effect yet, and based what I've seen so far I think it would need to include NO-OUTDOOR. > + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI I'm also unclear on whether this change is in effect yet. Thanks, Seth > # 60 GHz band channels 1-6 > (57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40) > > -- > 2.26.2 > _______________________________________________ wireless-regdb mailing list wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB 2020-11-20 17:54 ` Seth Forshee @ 2022-04-25 13:17 ` Ed W -1 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Ed W @ 2022-04-25 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Seth Forshee; +Cc: wireless-regdb, linux-wireless On 20/11/2020 17:54, Seth Forshee wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com> >> --- >> db.txt | 7 +++++-- >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt >> index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644 >> --- a/db.txt >> +++ b/db.txt >> @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf >> +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf >> country GB: DFS-ETSI >> (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) >> (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI >> (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI >> - (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI >> + (5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > This looks okay to me. > >> # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1) >> - (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW) >> + # See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47 >> + (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > To echo what I said above, I'm unclear whether this change is in effect > yet, and based what I've seen so far I think it would need to include > NO-OUTDOOR. > >> + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > I'm also unclear on whether this change is in effect yet. > > Thanks, > Seth > >> # 60 GHz band channels 1-6 >> (57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40) >> >> -- >> 2.26.2 >> Hi all, I dropped off watching this for a while.... Seems like the update to IR2030 (GB country code regulations) was re-published last year, and the relevant sections are in pages 32 + 34-36 My reading of this is: - Other stuff we changed 2 years ago seems ok, caveat I'm unclear when we need to state half power vs using mean EIRP? - The 5.9-6.4Ghz range is now good for use (page 35 near the bottom), perhaps add something like: + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI - The 60Ghz range seems to available now, but I'm not sure what power number we should have in our db.txt, see page 32. Says "40 dBm e.i.r.p / 27 dBm maximum transmit output power" - There are also some geographic restrictions, not sure what we can do about those? So something like this perhaps?: > + (5700 - 71000 @ 160), (40) Happy to knock this up into a patch if you can help with a little guidance (although it might be faster for you to just commit the 2 extra lines if you agree?) Thanks Ed W ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB @ 2022-04-25 13:17 ` Ed W 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Ed W @ 2022-04-25 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Seth Forshee; +Cc: wireless-regdb, linux-wireless On 20/11/2020 17:54, Seth Forshee wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com> >> --- >> db.txt | 7 +++++-- >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt >> index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644 >> --- a/db.txt >> +++ b/db.txt >> @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf >> +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf >> country GB: DFS-ETSI >> (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) >> (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI >> (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI >> - (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI >> + (5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > This looks okay to me. > >> # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1) >> - (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW) >> + # See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47 >> + (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > To echo what I said above, I'm unclear whether this change is in effect > yet, and based what I've seen so far I think it would need to include > NO-OUTDOOR. > >> + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > I'm also unclear on whether this change is in effect yet. > > Thanks, > Seth > >> # 60 GHz band channels 1-6 >> (57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40) >> >> -- >> 2.26.2 >> Hi all, I dropped off watching this for a while.... Seems like the update to IR2030 (GB country code regulations) was re-published last year, and the relevant sections are in pages 32 + 34-36 My reading of this is: - Other stuff we changed 2 years ago seems ok, caveat I'm unclear when we need to state half power vs using mean EIRP? - The 5.9-6.4Ghz range is now good for use (page 35 near the bottom), perhaps add something like: + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI - The 60Ghz range seems to available now, but I'm not sure what power number we should have in our db.txt, see page 32. Says "40 dBm e.i.r.p / 27 dBm maximum transmit output power" - There are also some geographic restrictions, not sure what we can do about those? So something like this perhaps?: > + (5700 - 71000 @ 160), (40) Happy to knock this up into a patch if you can help with a little guidance (although it might be faster for you to just commit the 2 extra lines if you agree?) Thanks Ed W _______________________________________________ wireless-regdb mailing list wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB 2022-04-25 13:17 ` Ed W @ 2022-05-13 21:35 ` Seth Forshee -1 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Seth Forshee @ 2022-05-13 21:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ed W; +Cc: Seth Forshee, wireless-regdb, linux-wireless On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 02:17:57PM +0100, Ed W wrote: > On 20/11/2020 17:54, Seth Forshee wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com> > >> --- > >> db.txt | 7 +++++-- > >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt > >> index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644 > >> --- a/db.txt > >> +++ b/db.txt > >> @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf > >> +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf > >> country GB: DFS-ETSI > >> (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) > >> (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > >> (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > >> - (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > >> + (5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > > This looks okay to me. > > > >> # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1) > >> - (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW) > >> + # See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47 > >> + (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > To echo what I said above, I'm unclear whether this change is in effect > > yet, and based what I've seen so far I think it would need to include > > NO-OUTDOOR. > > > >> + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > I'm also unclear on whether this change is in effect yet. > > > > Thanks, > > Seth > > > >> # 60 GHz band channels 1-6 > >> (57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40) > >> > >> -- > >> 2.26.2 > >> > > Hi all, I dropped off watching this for a while.... > > Seems like the update to IR2030 (GB country code regulations) was re-published last year, and the > relevant sections are in pages 32 + 34-36 > > My reading of this is: > > - Other stuff we changed 2 years ago seems ok, caveat I'm unclear when we need to state half power > vs using mean EIRP? We have to use half of the maximum EIRP in cases where TPC is required because Linux does not support TPC. This is why 5250-5350 and 5470-5730 have lower limits than what is prescribed in IR 2030. Note that many recent rules have also included power spectral density (PSD) limits, which can also limit the max EIRP in the database since there's currently no support for PSD limits in Linux or wireless-regdb. Where specified in IR 2030 they do not impose any limit beyond the max EIRP for the minimum relevant bandwidth for our purposes (20 MHz), so they don't end up making any difference here. > - The 5.9-6.4Ghz range is now good for use (page 35 near the bottom), perhaps add something like: > > + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI This looks about right. AUTO-BW isn't necessary since there are no adjacent rules. It looks like this was overlooked in the beginning, then the pattern was copied. > > - The 60Ghz range seems to available now, but I'm not sure what power number we should have in our > db.txt, see page 32. > Says "40 dBm e.i.r.p / 27 dBm maximum transmit output power" > - There are also some geographic restrictions, not sure what we can do about those? > > So something like this perhaps?: > > > + (5700 - 71000 @ 160), (40) We have a rule for this range already that looks fine to me. > Happy to knock this up into a patch if you can help with a little guidance (although it might be > faster for you to just commit the 2 extra lines if you agree?) I prefer that others write patches and I review them, since no one else really reviews the patches and it's always harder to spot errors in your own patches. But if you're unable to do it, I can create a patch. I think the 5725-5850 MHz change from above can also be included too, as long as it includes NO-OUTDOOR. Thanks, Seth ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB @ 2022-05-13 21:35 ` Seth Forshee 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Seth Forshee @ 2022-05-13 21:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ed W; +Cc: Seth Forshee, wireless-regdb, linux-wireless On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 02:17:57PM +0100, Ed W wrote: > On 20/11/2020 17:54, Seth Forshee wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com> > >> --- > >> db.txt | 7 +++++-- > >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt > >> index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644 > >> --- a/db.txt > >> +++ b/db.txt > >> @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf > >> +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf > >> country GB: DFS-ETSI > >> (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) > >> (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > >> (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > >> - (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > >> + (5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > > This looks okay to me. > > > >> # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1) > >> - (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW) > >> + # See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47 > >> + (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > To echo what I said above, I'm unclear whether this change is in effect > > yet, and based what I've seen so far I think it would need to include > > NO-OUTDOOR. > > > >> + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > I'm also unclear on whether this change is in effect yet. > > > > Thanks, > > Seth > > > >> # 60 GHz band channels 1-6 > >> (57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40) > >> > >> -- > >> 2.26.2 > >> > > Hi all, I dropped off watching this for a while.... > > Seems like the update to IR2030 (GB country code regulations) was re-published last year, and the > relevant sections are in pages 32 + 34-36 > > My reading of this is: > > - Other stuff we changed 2 years ago seems ok, caveat I'm unclear when we need to state half power > vs using mean EIRP? We have to use half of the maximum EIRP in cases where TPC is required because Linux does not support TPC. This is why 5250-5350 and 5470-5730 have lower limits than what is prescribed in IR 2030. Note that many recent rules have also included power spectral density (PSD) limits, which can also limit the max EIRP in the database since there's currently no support for PSD limits in Linux or wireless-regdb. Where specified in IR 2030 they do not impose any limit beyond the max EIRP for the minimum relevant bandwidth for our purposes (20 MHz), so they don't end up making any difference here. > - The 5.9-6.4Ghz range is now good for use (page 35 near the bottom), perhaps add something like: > > + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI This looks about right. AUTO-BW isn't necessary since there are no adjacent rules. It looks like this was overlooked in the beginning, then the pattern was copied. > > - The 60Ghz range seems to available now, but I'm not sure what power number we should have in our > db.txt, see page 32. > Says "40 dBm e.i.r.p / 27 dBm maximum transmit output power" > - There are also some geographic restrictions, not sure what we can do about those? > > So something like this perhaps?: > > > + (5700 - 71000 @ 160), (40) We have a rule for this range already that looks fine to me. > Happy to knock this up into a patch if you can help with a little guidance (although it might be > faster for you to just commit the 2 extra lines if you agree?) I prefer that others write patches and I review them, since no one else really reviews the patches and it's always harder to spot errors in your own patches. But if you're unable to do it, I can create a patch. I think the 5725-5850 MHz change from above can also be included too, as long as it includes NO-OUTDOOR. Thanks, Seth _______________________________________________ wireless-regdb mailing list wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB 2022-05-13 21:35 ` Seth Forshee @ 2022-06-06 14:41 ` Seth Forshee -1 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Seth Forshee @ 2022-06-06 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ed W; +Cc: Seth Forshee, wireless-regdb, linux-wireless On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 04:35:18PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 02:17:57PM +0100, Ed W wrote: > > On 20/11/2020 17:54, Seth Forshee wrote: > > >> Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com> > > >> --- > > >> db.txt | 7 +++++-- > > >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt > > >> index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644 > > >> --- a/db.txt > > >> +++ b/db.txt > > >> @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI > > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf > > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf > > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf > > >> +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf > > >> country GB: DFS-ETSI > > >> (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) > > >> (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > >> (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > >> - (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > > >> + (5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > > > This looks okay to me. > > > > > >> # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1) > > >> - (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW) > > >> + # See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47 > > >> + (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > > To echo what I said above, I'm unclear whether this change is in effect > > > yet, and based what I've seen so far I think it would need to include > > > NO-OUTDOOR. > > > > > >> + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > > I'm also unclear on whether this change is in effect yet. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Seth > > > > > >> # 60 GHz band channels 1-6 > > >> (57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40) > > >> > > >> -- > > >> 2.26.2 > > >> > > > > Hi all, I dropped off watching this for a while.... > > > > Seems like the update to IR2030 (GB country code regulations) was re-published last year, and the > > relevant sections are in pages 32 + 34-36 > > > > My reading of this is: > > > > - Other stuff we changed 2 years ago seems ok, caveat I'm unclear when we need to state half power > > vs using mean EIRP? > > We have to use half of the maximum EIRP in cases where TPC is required > because Linux does not support TPC. This is why 5250-5350 and 5470-5730 > have lower limits than what is prescribed in IR 2030. > > Note that many recent rules have also included power spectral density > (PSD) limits, which can also limit the max EIRP in the database since > there's currently no support for PSD limits in Linux or wireless-regdb. > Where specified in IR 2030 they do not impose any limit beyond the max > EIRP for the minimum relevant bandwidth for our purposes (20 MHz), so > they don't end up making any difference here. > > > - The 5.9-6.4Ghz range is now good for use (page 35 near the bottom), perhaps add something like: > > > > + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > This looks about right. AUTO-BW isn't necessary since there are no > adjacent rules. It looks like this was overlooked in the beginning, then > the pattern was copied. I've updated all rules for this range to remove AUTO-BW. I think the GB rule is correct now. I did a quick check of the other rules versus IR 2030, and they look okay to me. Let me know if you see any issues I missed. Thanks, Seth ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB @ 2022-06-06 14:41 ` Seth Forshee 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Seth Forshee @ 2022-06-06 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ed W; +Cc: Seth Forshee, wireless-regdb, linux-wireless On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 04:35:18PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 02:17:57PM +0100, Ed W wrote: > > On 20/11/2020 17:54, Seth Forshee wrote: > > >> Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists@wildgooses.com> > > >> --- > > >> db.txt | 7 +++++-- > > >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt > > >> index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644 > > >> --- a/db.txt > > >> +++ b/db.txt > > >> @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI > > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf > > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf > > >> # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf > > >> +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf > > >> country GB: DFS-ETSI > > >> (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) > > >> (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > >> (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > >> - (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > > >> + (5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI > > > This looks okay to me. > > > > > >> # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1) > > >> - (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW) > > >> + # See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47 > > >> + (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > > To echo what I said above, I'm unclear whether this change is in effect > > > yet, and based what I've seen so far I think it would need to include > > > NO-OUTDOOR. > > > > > >> + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > > I'm also unclear on whether this change is in effect yet. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Seth > > > > > >> # 60 GHz band channels 1-6 > > >> (57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40) > > >> > > >> -- > > >> 2.26.2 > > >> > > > > Hi all, I dropped off watching this for a while.... > > > > Seems like the update to IR2030 (GB country code regulations) was re-published last year, and the > > relevant sections are in pages 32 + 34-36 > > > > My reading of this is: > > > > - Other stuff we changed 2 years ago seems ok, caveat I'm unclear when we need to state half power > > vs using mean EIRP? > > We have to use half of the maximum EIRP in cases where TPC is required > because Linux does not support TPC. This is why 5250-5350 and 5470-5730 > have lower limits than what is prescribed in IR 2030. > > Note that many recent rules have also included power spectral density > (PSD) limits, which can also limit the max EIRP in the database since > there's currently no support for PSD limits in Linux or wireless-regdb. > Where specified in IR 2030 they do not impose any limit beyond the max > EIRP for the minimum relevant bandwidth for our purposes (20 MHz), so > they don't end up making any difference here. > > > - The 5.9-6.4Ghz range is now good for use (page 35 near the bottom), perhaps add something like: > > > > + (5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > This looks about right. AUTO-BW isn't necessary since there are no > adjacent rules. It looks like this was overlooked in the beginning, then > the pattern was copied. I've updated all rules for this range to remove AUTO-BW. I think the GB rule is correct now. I did a quick check of the other rules versus IR 2030, and they look okay to me. Let me know if you see any issues I missed. Thanks, Seth _______________________________________________ wireless-regdb mailing list wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-06-06 14:42 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2020-07-02 19:50 Correction of wireless-regdb for GB Ed W 2020-07-02 19:50 ` [wireless-regdb] " Ed W 2020-11-06 21:44 ` Seth Forshee 2020-11-06 21:44 ` Seth Forshee 2020-11-13 18:49 ` Ed W 2020-11-13 18:49 ` Ed W 2020-11-20 17:54 ` Seth Forshee 2020-11-20 17:54 ` Seth Forshee 2022-04-25 13:17 ` Ed W 2022-04-25 13:17 ` Ed W 2022-05-13 21:35 ` Seth Forshee 2022-05-13 21:35 ` Seth Forshee 2022-06-06 14:41 ` Seth Forshee 2022-06-06 14:41 ` Seth Forshee
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.